Having taken the time to actually read this Peterson/Pew Report, I was amused that what the report calls for is a plan for future budget cuts, starting in 2014. So plans for making national cuts are pasted the next presidential election--if he is so concerned, why doesn't he call for cuts now? Oh yeah, that would not allow the GOP to spend the next few years complaining and voting no on every budget prior to the next presidential election.
Note, in this paper, it does not directly say to cut Social Security, it only talks to discretionary spending and non-discretionary spending. Now how many generic readers know where Social Security funds are appropriated?
It is indeed disheartening to see a major print publication not add an informational caveat that would enlighten readers about the author. Only when the political leanings of a author are known can one make an intelligent evaluation of an article. Most individuals, myself included, are now being tasked with researching each author to determine their possible underlying agenda.
There are lots of individuals who "sound sincere," but are mere posers... and a failure by a newspaper to ennuciate the background of someone is one of the reasons that paper journalism is dropping like a stone. Why is it that Internet journalism can manage this task and newsprint can't, or won't .
San Antonio, TX
Jan 13 2010 - 1:28pm